MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4210599058 · doi:10.1007/s12027-022-00701-0

The Holship ruling of the ECtHR and the protection of fundamental rights in Europe

2022· article· en· W4210599058 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Hans Petter Graver

Bibliographic record

VenueERA Forum · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicEuropean and International Law Studies
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersUniversitetet i Oslo
KeywordsHuman rightsPolitical sciencePublic international lawFundamental rightsAssertionLaw and economicsInternational human rights lawProportionality (law)LawEuropean unionInternational lawInternational tradeEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract The status of trade union rights in the EU has been contentious since the CJEU sent shockwaves through the trade unions of Europe in December 2007 with its rulings in the cases of Viking and Laval . In its recent Holship ruling, the ECtHR has challenged these rulings. Contrary to the assertion of the CJEU in Laval that it is inherent in the very exercise of trade union rights and the right to take collective action that they will be prejudiced to a certain degree, the ECtHR stated that “the degree to which a collective action risks having economic consequences cannot (…) in and of itself be a decisive consideration in the analysis of proportionality under Article 11”. This has potentially wide-reaching implications for the relationship between the human rights recognized in international human rights conventions and EU fundamental rights.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.964
Threshold uncertainty score0.828

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.017
GPT teacher head0.256
Teacher spread0.239 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueERA ForumSame topicEuropean and International Law StudiesFrench-language works237,207